In the head-to-head comparison between the products of these three vendors – based on 3,146 criteria -- IFS bested Mincom and CHAMPS for overall EAM functionality combined with financials and human resources as well as overall EAM functionality without financials and human resources.

Technology Evaluation Centers completed the comparison on its own, and the project was not underwritten by IFS or any of its partners or resellers

“To eliminate any chance of bias, and to ensure a level playing field, all 3,146 criteria comprising the modules and submodules in the EAM request for information (RFI) were given equal weight and priority. In other words, no area of functionality was treated as being more important than any other,” wrote Analyst Sadat Zaman.

“Honestly, we are not surprised with the results of this comparison,” IFS North America President and CEO Cindy Jaudon said. “More than 20 years ago, IFS started out in the EAM area exclusively, and grew from there into a global enterprise applications company. The results of this study reinforce our reasons for becoming a complete enterprise application provider, namely the benefits that come with an EAM application that is tightly integrated the business system. And since IFS also compared favorably with a best-of-breed solution, we can confidently say that there are few compromises with selecting IFS over a more narrowly-focused competitor.”

In the report, Zaman encourages those considering various EAM solutions to conduct a more detailed comparison between IFS and competitors. Objective comparisons on very specific elements of functionality are possible at Technology Evaluation Centers’ EAM Evaluation Center. Jaudon encourages further comparisons as well.

“We are very fond of evaluation centers like this, where our prospects can compare IFS Applications directly with our competitors,” Jaudon said. “We are confident enough in our products to compare side-by-side with anyone else in the market."